A Comparative Analysis of the Psychological Literature on Collaboration Between Clergy and Mental-Health Professionals—Perspectives from Secular and Religious Journals: 1970–1999

A search of the psychological literature was conducted to obtain a better understanding of the issues surrounding collaboration between clergy and psychologists. An electronic search of PsycINFO for 1970–1999 ultimately yielded 52 articles in secular journals and 37 articles in religiously oriented journals that discussed collaboration. Whereas interest in collaboration peaked in religious journals during the 1980's, the number of articles on collaboration appearing in secular journals increased significantly from 1970 to 1999. Content analysis confirmed six major themes about collaboration found by A. J. Weaver, K. J. Flannelly, L. T. Flannelly, and J. E. Oppenheimer (2003). One of the most common themes was the clergy's role as frontline mental-health workers, which was mentioned significantly more often in secular than religious journals. The need for greater education and knowledge was also mentioned significantly more often in secular than religious journals. Insufficient knowledge or education was frequently seen as an obstacle to collaboration. Other factors affecting collaboration are discussed.     

Experiences of collaborative research

The author's personal history of the research that led to his recognition in economics is described, focusing on the process of collaboration and on the experience of controversy. The author's collaboration with Amos Tversky dealt with 3 major topics: judgment under uncertainty, decision making, and framing effects. A subsequent collaboration, with the economist Richard Thaler, played a role in the development of behavioral economics. Procedures to make controversies more productive and constructive are suggested.     

Collaboration and Social Inquiry: Multiple Meanings of a Construct and Its Role in Creating Useful and Valid Knowledge

The concept of collaboration in community research and intervention, although not new, has grown tremendously in importance in the past 20 years. Yet, it is both a contested concept in terms of its intent and a still evolving idea in terms of its meaning and implications. The purpose of this monograph is to begin to "unpack" the collaboration construct in terms of its many meanings, rationales, goals, models, dynamics, and accomplishments. Although models of collaboration are often well articulated there is "partial paradigm acquisition" (E. J. Trickett, 1984) in terms of understanding their behavioral and ethical implications. There is more theology than conclusion. The promise of collaboration, although considerable, is still in need of multiple and varied empirical examples of how collaboration contributes to both the process and goals of community research and intervention, however defined. The monograph closes with a brief overview of what we have learned from reviewing this literature, an articulation of the kinds of questions that need to be addressed, and a series of recommendations for how to increase our understanding of the collaboration construct in community research and intervention.     

A social psychological perspective on World War II collaboration in the 21st century: A Belgian case

The present study addresses antecedents and consequences of attitudes towards collaboration in the context of World War II (WWII) in Belgium. A survey conducted on 922 Belgian French- and Dutch-speaking participants shows that, on overall, Dutch-speakers perceive collaboration as more moral and support amnesty of the former collaborators at a higher level than their Francophone counterparts. In addition, we show that these attitudes are predicted by the generational belonging, linguistic and national identification of the participants. Finally, we find that attitudes towards WWII collaboration are linked to specific political prospects for the future of the country only among Dutch-speakers. These findings suggest that, 75 years after its end, the issue of collaboration during WWII still divides the Belgian society. Furthermore, they underline the added value of a multilevel approach in the understanding of social psychological phenomena.     

Understanding Interdisciplinary Collaborations as Social Networks

The dynamics of interdisciplinary collaboration invite further investigation if we are to make this endeavour more rewarding and productive. We are using social network analysis to track the development of a new interdisciplinary collaboration on complex interventions to improve population health. It involves nineteen scholars across four countries. We report the Baseline network of formal relationships among the scholars, along with the impact of the collaboration on these relationships in the first 18 months. We observed statistically significant increases in the density of six types of relationship networks: citing publications by other members of the collaboration, email contact, meeting with each other (outside of the formal annual meeting), visiting one another's institution, submitting research grants together and working on research projects together. The initial strategic role in the network of key 'gate keepers' has not altered substantially (betweenness centralization of the networks), but reciprocity has increased, that is, people are more likely to cite those who have cited them and work together. Increased collaboration is also reflected in the rise in number of subgroups over time and the increase in the average number of subgroup memberships. Use of social network analysis to understand the dynamics of interdisciplinary collaborations is a relatively new field. It invites reflection about what the optimal network structures for interdisciplinary collaborations would look like.     

Collaboration Talk: The Folk Theories of Nano Research

The nano initiative in the US and elsewhere encourages and promotes various forms of multi-stakeholder activities, such as industrial collaborations. Forming part of the discourse of expectations around emerging technologies, collaboration is an important resource holding together different practices of knowledge production. In the conversations between policy and science, collaboration becomes a measurable entity and a measure in itself, figuring in the evaluations of the performance of individual faculty and research centres; however, the policy metaphor of ‘collaboration’ stands for a variety of different forms and shapes of interactions between university and industry. From a discourse analysis perspective, ‘folk theories’ of nano collaboration help to explore the dynamics of the university/industry boundary in the scientific organisational discourse as in a recent series of interactions with scientists, university officials and technology transfer officers in a number of US universities. What does the introduction of the new entity (nano) mean for scientists, and for university practices of technology transfer and commercialisation, in terms of trying to accommodate individual ‘nano’ cases into university regulations and procedures? How are these practices and experiences discussed in terms of collaboration? Assessments of value of collaboration ranged between polarised views, raising questions about occasions, audiences and communities of assessors invoked in the construction of acceptable accounts of nano collaboration. Metaphors and analogies were used to mobilise specific meanings in the discourses of the innovative potential of emerging fields. As such, assessments of the potential of terms pertinent to the emerging discourses, such as collaboration, would be better based on the assumption of shared meanings, not fixed and given, but actively achieved.     

Rethinking Collaborative Learning Through Participation in an Interdisciplinary Research Project: Tensions and Negotiations as Key Points in Knowledge Production

As social and cultural psychologists of learning, we are persuaded of the crucial role of interaction in development and learning. But how do we experience this assumption in our own research practices and in our collaboration with colleagues? Taking as our object of study our own participation in a European Research and Development project that aimed to enhance interactive and argumentative skills in learning settings, this study shows how collaboration among project partners is not something that is to be taken for granted, but something that is elaborated and evolves in time, takes diverse forms, and is mediated by multiple tools. The psychological processes—more particularly tensions and negotiation—involved in collaboration are developed and discussed. The study explores the processes of establishing collaboration and, through the analysis of specific zones of tensions, sheds light on the way new knowledge (on how to do research, how to communicate, how to work together) is constructed. It contributes to the understanding of the issues and conditions for the development of a community of practice.     

Attitudes toward interdisciplinary collaboration in pupil personnel services teams

A scale designed to measure the extent of collaboration of pupil personnel services teams was validated against a judge's rating of collaboration and the existence of regular planning meetings between pupil personnel services teams and school personnel. The judge's ratings and the collaboration scale scores varied in the classification of one team, which suggested two differing definitions of interdisciplinary collaboration to be further explored. The semantic differential responses of school personnel indicated that high collaboration teams in high input schools were seen as more independent and more cooperative than were the low collaboration teams and were reported as functioning more often as a team than as individuals.     

The effects of collaborative practice on statistical problem solving: Benefits and boundaries

In recent years, understanding the effects of collaboration on learning and memory has emerged as a major topic of investigation. Findings from applied educational research and from basic cognitive research demonstrate a complex view of how collaboration affects learning. The present laboratory study bridged these two domains of research to address the question of how collaborative learning affects statistical problem solving. After viewing a lecture, participants completed two statistics tests. They either completed the tests collaboratively and then individually, or completed both tests individually. Results showed an immediate benefit of collaboration, but this benefit did not persist on a subsequent individual test. Repeated practice by those who worked individually increased performance to the level of those who had previously collaborated. These results were qualified by gender as females showed a consistent benefit from prior collaboration on the post-collaborative test, particularly on conceptual problems. Implications for education are discussed.     

Authorship Ethics: Issues and Suggested Guidelines for the Helping Professions

The authors review the literature and explore common ethical dilemmas related to publishing research. Varying standards are presented to assist professionals and students in their publication endeavors. Joint research collaboration in many graduate programs is encouraged and appears inevitable. Joint research activities may involve student–faculty collaboration or professional peer collaboration. Although many helping professions have ethics codes that address publication issues, there is no standard among them regarding the issue of authorship. Although it appears necessary to follow minimal codes of ethics regarding authorship, consideration of suggested guidelines and aspirational ethics may enhance the professional growth of mental health professionals and students in mental health programs.     

Toward a Science of Transdisciplinary Action Research

This paper offers a conceptual framework for establishing a science of transdisciplinary action research. Lewin's (1951) concept of action research highlights the scientific and societal value of translating psychological research into community problem-solving strategies. Implicit in Lewin's formulation is the importance of achieving effective collaboration among behavioral researchers, community members and policy makers. The present analysis builds on Lewin's analysis by outlining programmatic directions for the scientific study of transdisciplinary research and community action. Three types of collaboration, and the contextual circumstances that facilitate or hinder them, are examined: (1) collaboration among scholars representing different disciplines; (2) collaboration among researchers from multiple fields and community practitioners representing diverse professional and lay perspectives; and (3) collaboration among community organizations across local, state, national, and international levels. In the present analysis, transdisciplinary action research is viewed as a topic of scientific study in its own right to achieve a more complete understanding of prior collaborations and to identify strategies for refining and sustaining future collaborations (and their intended outcomes) among researchers, community members and organizations.     

The Parents Matter! Program: Building a Successful Investigator-Community Partnership

We examine the issues involved in creating and maintaining a successful collaboration between university-based researchers and community members when designing and implementing the Parents Matter! Program (PMP). The roles of focus groups, community advisory boards, and community liaisons are highlighted. PMP provides an illustration of the ongoing process of collaboration between investigators and community members and the benefits and challenges of such a partnership.     

A Process Perspective of International Research Collaboration

International collaboration on research projects is becoming important as countries experience similar problems that need attention. The process of such research collaboration is discussed with specific reference to initiating collaborative research, evaluating the potential of entering into a research partnership, preparing for travel, developing and completing a project, and maintaining international collaborative research relationships. Factors that enhance and diminish such relationships are also discussed.     

Chance favours only the prepared mind: Incubation and the delayed effects of peer collaboration

Research has shown that the beneficial effects of peer collaboration are not always apparent until some time has elapsed. Such delayed effects are not readily incorporated in current models of collaborative learning, but because they constitute incubation effects in the psychological sense of the term, they should in principle be consistent with cognitive accounts of how incubation occurs. Accordingly, the paper reports three studies which test whether, in accordance with cognitive models of incubation, the delayed effects of peer collaboration could result from: (a) the breaking over time of unhelpful mental sets, (b) the engagement in post‐collaborative reflective appraisal, and (c) the experience of subsequent events that, thanks to collaboration, can be used productively. The studies involved 9‐ to 12‐year‐old children working on the factors relevant to floating and sinking. The results provide no evidence for the relevance of set breaking or reflective appraisal, but suggest strongly that peer collaboration can ‘prime’ children to make good use of subsequent input. It is argued that in addition to clarifying how the delayed effects occur and applying incubation models in a novel context, the results flag up issues that are common to collaborative and cognitive theory, and that neither address adequately.     

Short-term and long-term collaboration benefits on individual recall in younger and older adults

A recent study of younger adults suggests that, compared to repeated individual recall trials, repeated collaborative recall trials produce better individual recall after a short delay (Blumen & Rajaram, 2008). Our study was designed to determine if such collaboration benefits would remain after a one-week delay, in both younger and older adults. Sixty younger (M age = 24.60) and 60 older (M age = 67.35) adults studied a list of words and then completed either two collaborative recall trials followed by two individual recall trials, or four individual recall trials. A five-min delay was inserted between the first three recall trials. The fourth recall trial was administered 1 week later. Collaborative recall was completed in groups of three individuals working together. Both younger and older adults benefitted from repeated collaborative recall trials to a greater extent than repeated individual recall trials, and such collaboration benefits remained after a one-week delay. This is the first demonstration of collaboration benefits on later individual recall at delays as long as 1 week, in both younger and older adults. Findings are discussed within the context of the negative effects of collaboration associated with group memory (collaborative inhibition) and the positive effects of collaboration associated with later individual memory (collaboration benefits).     

Mental Health Collaboration: A Survey of Practicing School Psychologists

Schools have become the primary setting for mental health service among youth. However, school-based providers are sometimes limited by lack of time, training, and other resources. Furthermore, problem-solving models emphasize the importance of developing partnerships with other professionals and agencies. Thus, it is critical to engage in collaborative practice with non–school-based, community mental health providers (CMHPs). The purpose of this study was to survey practicing school psychologists about their experiences in communicating and collaborating with CMHPs. Participants (n = 194) indicated their frequency of communication and collaboration with CMHPs; although communication (i.e., release and receipt of information) was typical, fewer school psychologists reported engaging in ongoing collaboration. Benefits and barriers to collaboration were identified, and implications for practice are discussed.     

Nonconscious goals can shape what people want to feel

Goals can determine what people want to feel (e.g., Tamir et al., 2008), but can they do so even when they are primed outside of conscious awareness? In two studies, participants wanted to feel significantly less angry after they were implicitly primed with a collaboration goal, compared to a neutral prime. These effects were found with different implicit priming manipulations, direct and indirect measures of emotional preferences, and when controlling for concurrent emotional experiences. The effects were obtained in social contexts in which the potential for collaboration was relatively higher (Study 1) and lower (Study 2). Also, similar effects were found when collaboration was activated nonconsciously (Studies 1–2) and consciously (Study 2). By showing that nonconscious goals can shape emotional preferences, we demonstrate that what people want to feel can be determined by factors they are unaware of.     

Do frequency representations eliminate conjunction effects? An exercise in adversarial collaboration

The present article offers an approach to scientific debate called adversarial collaboration. The approach requires both parties to agree on empirical tests for resolving a dispute and to conduct these tests with the help of an arbiter. In dispute were Hertwig's claims that frequency formats eliminate conjunction effects and that the conjunction effects previously reported by Kahneman and Tversky occurred because some participants interpreted the word "and" in "bank tellers and feminists" as a union operator. Hertwig proposed two new conjunction phrases, "and are" and "who are," that would eliminate the ambiguity. Kahneman disagreed with Hertwig's predictions for "and are," but agreed with his predictions for "who are." Mellers served as arbiter. Frequency formats by themselves did not eliminate conjunction effects with any of the phrases, but when filler items were removed, conjunction effects disappeared with Hertwig's phrases. Kahneman and Hertwig offer different interpretations of the findings. We discuss the benefits of adversarial collaboration over replies and rejoinders, and present a suggested protocol for adversarial collaboration.     

Effects of cueing and collaboration on the acquisition of complex legal skills

Background. To overcome the teacher bandwidth problem in supporting large groups of students, both automated process support (cueing) and face‐to‐face feedback by peers during small group work (collaboration) can be provided to students. Aim. The purpose of this experimental study was to examine whether a multimedia practical containing cueing could be effectively combined with peer feedback to support the acquisition of the complex skill of preparing a plea in court. Sample. In the context of a regular court practical, 50 junior law students at a Dutch university individually studied a multimedia practical and participated in small group discussions about intermediate learning outcomes of the practical. Method. The study examined the effects of cueing and collaboration on training outcomes and transfer pleas, and on cognitive activity during collaboration, by combining the multimedia practical and small group collaboration to support the complex task of preparing a plea in court. Results. Both cueing and collaboration positively influence training outcomes, with participants without cueing benefiting most from additional collaboration. Transfer plea scores reveal a positive effect of collaboration but a negative effect of cueing. Analysis of discussions during small group collaboration reveals a negative effect of cueing on the level of cognitive activity. Conclusion. Peer feedback during small group work indeed appears to be a feasible option to be combined with or (partially) substitute individualized cueing when training complex learning tasks.     

The influence of learning methods on collaboration: prior repeated retrieval enhances retrieval organization, abolishes collaborative inhibition, and promotes post-collaborative memory

Research on collaborative memory has unveiled the counterintuitive yet robust phenomenon that collaboration impairs group recall. A candidate explanation for this collaborative inhibition effect is the disruption of people's idiosyncratic retrieval strategies during collaboration, and it is hypothesized that employing methods that improve one's organization protects against retrieval disruption. Here it is investigated how one's learning method during the study phase--defined as either repeatedly studying or repeatedly retrieving information--influences retrieval organization and what effects this has on collaborative recall and post-collaborative individual recall. Results show that repeated retrieval consistently eliminated collaborative inhibition. This enabled participants to gain the most from re-exposure to materials recalled by their partners that they themselves did not recall and led to improvements in their individual memory following collaboration. This repeated retrieval advantage stemmed from the preferential manner in which this learning method strengthened retrieval organization. Findings are also discussed that reveal a relationship between retrieval organization and the interaction observed between learning method and short versus long delay seen in the testing effect literature. Finally, results show that the elusive benefits of cross-cuing during collaboration may be best detected with a longer study-test delay. Together, these findings illuminate when and how collaboration can enhance memory.